Personally I’d spend the money on the carbon frame then upgrade as finances permit.

 

There's no right answer. Carbon fiber is generally more repairable than aluminum, but aluminum is more resistant to point impact damage. Most of the time, the carbon frame will be a good pound lighter. That's a pound you don't have to lug around everywhere. They also build very stiff frames, which is good. But again, aluminum is generally cheaper and allows you to spend more in other places and the suspension tune/forks/shocks are far more important as to how the bike rides, so that's where you want to spend the money. Sometimes the carbon bike happens to come with the better forks/shocks, but if I had to choose, I'd take an aluminum frame and better suspension, rather than carbon and lesser suspension.

 

That is a hard question.

If I was working with a budget I would buy an aluminum frame with best components I could afford. I think there is a very small performance gain (if any) for a carbon frame, where as there can be significant improvements in a level of components.

However, I always think about resale and people are suckers for carbon frames. You will probably take a smaller hit on a carbon frame bike than an aluminum bike.

 

Aluminum frame and nicer components, no question.

On a full suspension bike there is little benefit to a carbon frame, weight being the only thing and you're probably only talking about 1.5-2lbs (depending). You can save more weight than that in the components.

I'd spend the savings on good wheels, good brakes, good suspension, etc. These are parts of the bike that can make a tangible improvement in your ride and experience on the bike.

A carbon frame won't improve your experience or make you a better/faster rider. Good suspension and wheels can/will.

I'm also of the opinion that if you can't afford to repair/replace a carbon frame, don't buy it in the first place.

 

Aluminum frame and nicer components, no question.

On a full suspension bike there is little benefit to a carbon frame, weight being the only thing and you're probably only talking about 1.5-2lbs (depending). You can save more weight than that in the components.

I'd spend the savings on good wheels, good brakes, good suspension, etc. These are parts of the bike that can make a tangible improvement in your ride and experience on the bike.

A carbon frame won't improve your experience or make you a better/faster rider. Good suspension and wheels can/will.

I'm also of the opinion that if you can't afford to repair/replace a carbon frame, don't buy it in the first place.

So much this ^^^.

But then I bought a metal frame because I wanted a metal frame, not because I couldn't afford a carbon frame. Too many friends and acquaintances have bad stories to tell about carbon frame disasters.

I'm 6'2" tall and weigh 200#. My bike (180f/140r travel) weighs around 36# -- that's a combined 236 pounds.
If I want a lighter package, I'll drop a pound or two of body weight. Meanwhile I'm not doing without awesome suspension, dependable components, powerful brakes, wheels & tires that provide Velcro traction, etc.

I don't even want a lighter bike. But then I have to admit that I can't tell a couple pounds difference in my bike one way or another. Lots of guys seem to be able to -- well, good (or bad) for them. Is being able to notice a 1# difference in frame weight a blessing or a curse? As for me, I love being able to do whatever I want to do on a bike that can be repeatedly abused practically without care. And that's what I do -- repeatedly abuse mine, practically without care.
=sParty

 

I'm sure I'll be looking to upgrade my bike at some point, so my question is-considering financial constraints, is it better to get a carbon frame with lower end components or get an aluminum frame with better components?

If it helps, I'm looking at probably $2,500 -$3,500 range. Maybe short travel trail bike like Tallboy, Stumpjumper ST, or Canyon Neuron.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

what are you riding now? are the parts worth swapping over to a better frame?

i just swapped most of the parts from my hawk hill (which i had upgraded over time) to a 2019 5010 CC v3 which was on sale for $2399. it might be worth looking at some of the other frame and shock combos available on clearance.

 

2019 Specialized Fuse Comp 27.5 +. It's a hard tail with Rock Shox Recon and a mix of SRAM NX and Specialized parts. I like it fine and it's great for my local trails, but I'm looking ahead to when I can start making some trips to western NC and would probably want a full suspension bike at some point.

Probably shorter travel because I don't really need a lot of travel for my every day rides, but would like to have a capable machine for those trips to the mountains.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Santa Cruz seems to put a much better fork and shock on the aluminum bikes that are the same price as the cheap carbon. In that case I would go aluminum. As a bonus you get slightly better wheels and drivetrain.

Drivetrains on ebay are a dime a dozen so if thats the only thing different then I would go carbon, same with wheels since the wheels you get with bikes arent all that great anyways unless going top end.

Upgrading the fork and shock is too expensive even when going the ebay route.

 

I chose Al with carbon rims and top shelf parts and suspension over a carbon frame. There seems to be a lot of posts on FB and here on broken carbon frames and stays that I'd rather not deal with, especially the grief from the frame company dragging their feet on a warranty.

 

After owning many carbon wunderbikes interspersed with aluminum here and there, I’m coming to a place where I really don’t see the advantage of carbon. Except maybe in resale value, though that’s debatable.

The way carbon frames are being overbuilt— likely for fewer warranty issues — takes much of the weight savings out the door. And if you can really discern any material stiffness difference in a full-suspension frame, well, that’s awesome.

 

Agree with the two posts above this. I have become a fan of aluminum frames and there's a good chance I won't own a carbon frame again. Carbon seems to have a higher failure rate and although I could easily afford it, I have a hard time justifying the premium costs to have a very small percentage increase in performance and weight savings. If I want to save a pound or two in weight then I can eat a little less for free. There's also the trend now of carbon bikes weighing over 30 lbs., being built more for durability. If you're into the environmental side then you can also sleep better at night knowing your aluminum frame is more "green" ha ha.

 

I've been leaning toward aluminum because a pound or two difference in the frame isn't what's holding me back-- it's the extra 40 pounds I'm carrying around my waist that's slowing me down.

 

Aluminum. The hard part is it's sometimes hard to find an aluminum frame with high-end components. You'll notice the benefits of a better fork and shock much more than the frame material and a couple of pounds. If I was on a budget and able to put together a custom build without the typical huge custom build monetary penalty, it would be: Al frame, near top notch suspension, good dropper, mid-tier everything else.

As for the strength issue, it depends what you ride and where you live. Flow trails, carbon all day. Tech trails with sharp, abrasive rocks - Aluminum.

 

Carbon.

What are considered "low end" components would have been part of a dream build five years ago. For example, SRAM Eagle GX works just as well as XX1 or XO1 for about a third of the cost.

And NX, the bargain basement of 12-speed SRAM groupsets, is cheaper still, works great, looks sharp, and doesn't even need an XD driver. Many respectable bikes come with NX now.

Get the nicer frame and upgrade if you want to. I bought a carbon full-suspension bike with GX and told myself I was going to upgrade but there is no reason to. I like cool stuff and don't mind spending money on bikes but 1000 bucks extra to save a 3/4 of a pound is not on my priority list.

 

Carbon.

I like cool stuff and don't mind spending money on bikes but 1000 bucks extra to save a 3/4 of a pound is not on my priority list.

Irony.

 

I think it depends on style of bike.
If you are looking for light weight XC style bike the carbon is the way to go since you can never remove the weight of the frame despite all the upgrades you put in. However if you are looking at heavy enduro beast then aluminum is nice because they can take beating and who cares about half a pound on a 32lbs bike?

That said my bikes are carbon or Ti and run carbon wheels. Even my enduro bike is carbon because I don't want the extra weight and because there was no aluminum version when I bought it. It does have GX drivetrain
where I would like a XX1 or X01 drivetrain. My carbon XC bike has XX1 drivetrain and it "nicer" than GX, but I know I can always upgrade the GX if I wanted to. So far other than weight of the cassette I don't see the need.

 

Carbon! Lighter, stiffer, stronger, more repairable.

I'm a believer of spend as much as you can on fame, forks, shocks. Then build the rest around that. Upgrade as parts as the wear out. Then you can build your way into awesomenss.

Plus an extra couple of pounds does make a noticeable difference to the the playfullness of a bike. It does matter!

 

The difference between the alloy and carbon C tallboy frame is 1.5 lbs. That makes a noticeable difference. I haven't ridden the alloy Tallboy but in my experience carbon is significantly stiffer. My wife and a buddy each have medium Trance 29's. My wife's is carbon with carbon wheels and my buddy's all alloy. The difference is staggering. Riding them back to back was shocking. I'm not even talking about deflecting off trail obstacles, just playing around in the parking lot it's obvious how flexy the alloy frame and wheels are. That may not be true of every alloy bike but it's something to keep in mind.

 

Yep. Al frame for me and higher end components & wheels. IMO, FS frame material has no consequential effect on performance. Unless you're XC racing, weight diff is inconsequential, and for most, even then. Prob is, most mfgrs don't put the good stuff on until you're into their carbon frames.

FWIW, my CF Tallboy 3 is 30.4 lb with pedals. My al Fuel EX is 28.2 lb. A full 22 oz water bottle weighs 1.7 lb. Compare riding with and without to see what difference that amount of weight makes.

 

Yep. Al frame for me and higher end components & wheels. IMO, FS frame material has no consequential effect on performance. Unless you're XC racing, weight diff is inconsequential, and for most, even then. Prob is, most mfgrs don't put the good stuff on until you're into their carbon frames.

FWIW, my CF Tallboy 3 is 30.4 lb with pedals. My al Fuel EX is 28.2 lb. A full 22 oz water bottle weighs 1.7 lb. Compare riding with and without to see what difference that amount of weight makes.

By comparison my Carbon Ripmo is 30lbs. My Carbon FS Epic is 22.9lbs. My Ti Singlespeed is 22.5lbs. Yes I notice the difference. I have raced the Epic many times and would have been racing the Ti SS had it not been for race cancellations. I have raced the Ripmo in enduro, but I am not skilled/brave enough to be competitive in those.

 

Aluminum with better components.

 

Carbon with better components. That's my vote.